Some Realizations about Shipwrecked

[SinisterOctopus]

I have been reading the forums here for a while now, and just now joined them a little over a week ago in anticipation of Shipwrecked. (Shipwrecked Hype!) Over the past few days, I've watched the painfully violent backlash against Klei unfold as it was revealed that Shipwrecked would be a standalone expansion. I've held back from the forums lately, as I was not eager to get involved in what was quite honestly a spectacularly rude response from the forums. However, as I've seen the shift that came with Joew announcing that they're "not really feeling like our plans meet expectations in a way that we are happy with" and they'll "update you guys next week on how we're going to approach this based on your feedback," I've decided that my probably unpopular opinion needs to be expressed before things get even more out of hand. Because I've realized two things.

 

First, Don't Starve Shipwrecked makes perfect sense as a standalone. "Don't Starve is an uncompromising wilderness survival game full of science and magic." And the overhaul of Don't Starve to create Shipwrecked means that a lot of content unnecessary to Shipwrecked will be removed, and a lot of new content will be added that honestly won't make sense in a Don't Starve Reign of Giants world with drastically different mechanics. I am confident that Don't Starve Shipwrecked will be great as an uncompromising tropical survival game full of science and magic. The other thing to keep in mind is that this was made in collaboration with Capy games, and they deserve to have their names right next to Klei's on the credits of their own game, and not as a footnote on a dlc that they were strongly involved in.

 

Secondly, the attitude of the forums over the past couple of days. The Shipwrecked demo was met with a great deal of criticism, while people seem to have forgotten why Klei put a Work in Progress disclaimer at the top of the demo. Nowhere near all of the content that will be in Shipwrecked is in the demo, and since this is an alpha build, a great deal more content will be in the final product, and items and entities that were obviously placeholders are just that, placeholders. A much more polished final product can be expected. However, after Joew addressed the feedback, I've noticed a shift from backlash to something almost as unhelpful. Where previously the forums were filled with speculation about Shipwrecked, I am now seeing a forum filled almost entirely with demands for how Klei can fix Shipwrecked and demands that Shipwrecked meet the exact demands of the community. While I think we can all agree that we value a company that values our feedback, this attitude of demand is cancerous, and I can guarantee that if Klei gives in to this backlash, we will see a product that is severely compromised and worse off because of it.

 

I have confidence that Shipwrecked will be a great game in its own right, and I'd like to ask Klei to honor their creative vision, which has never let us down before, over the demands of the people who lost faith and turned on Klei so quickly.

 

Sincerely,

A fan.

 

 

*EDIT*

 

too long; didn't read/too real; misread entirely

 

The main point of my longwinded (and occasionally overly emphatic) post is that the Frankensteinian sum of everyone's individual game preferences will not be as good as Klei's creative vision for Shipwrecked.

 

 

Side point:

 

You either die a hero, or live long enough to see yourself arguing with every single person who takes it upon themself to dissect your entire post.

[talmatityaho]

hey your opinion is completely acceptable, I don't want Klei to listen to every single thing the community wants, they should have there own opinion and its there right to do anything with don't starve.

I just think that Shipwrecked should be included into Don't starve, it doesn't have to affect the main world, it can be like caves, i't just makes way more sens than a totality different game.

[ThaumicParrot]

I 100% agree with you. The only thing I'd like is that SW uses the same launcher, so when the game loads up you can choose between regular DS or SW, Similar to how in the shovel knight DLC the game loads up and you choose to play as shovel knight or plague knight:

[emerphish]

With every large innovation or expansion to a product that a consumer, well, consumes, there is a risk factor involved. The Don't Starve fanbase (especially the ones that are here on the forums) obviously love the base game. It would be my guess that, at least on some level, people know that even if the DLC isn't totally to their taste (and with the presence of Capy games that is a possibility) they can still enjoy the game and the new content it has to offer. Plus, it would change things up a bit. But if it is a standalone expansion, it may not add the same level of replay value, and, lets all be honest here, without mods RoG is stale. Apologies if I wasn't very clear,

 

TL:DR- fans want some spice to the base game they already love, but if shipwrecked is a standalone expansion and they dislike it, they will have no new content to enjoy.

[Battal]

I have been reading the forums here for a while now, and just now joined them a little over a week ago in anticipation of Shipwrecked. (Shipwrecked Hype!) Over the past few days, I've watched the painfully violent backlash against Klei unfold as it was revealed that Shipwrecked would be a standalone expansion. I've held back from the forums lately, as I was not eager to get involved in what was quite honestly a spectacularly rude response from the forums. However, as I've seen the shift that came with Joew announcing that they're "not really feeling like our plans meet expectations in a way that we are happy with" and they'll "update you guys next week on how we're going to approach this based on your feedback," I've decided that my probably unpopular opinion needs to be expressed before things get even more out of hand. Because I've realized two things.

 

 

First off, I think you're overdramatizing things a bit.  There hasn't been a "painfully violent" backlash, and it certainly wasn't rude; we've been stating our opinions to a company that has constantly been asking for them, whether or not that opinion is in agreement with them.  You haven't been here very long, so take it from me that Klei has constantly used and benefited from the community's support and responses. 

 

Don't Starve Shipwrecked makes perfect sense as a standalone. "Don't Starve is an uncompromising wilderness survival game full of science and magic." And the overhaul of Don't Starve to create Shipwrecked means that a lot of content unnecessary to Shipwrecked will be removed, and a lot of new content will be added that honestly won't make sense in a Don't Starve Reign of Giants world with drastically different mechanics. I am confident that Don't Starve Shipwrecked will be great as an uncompromising tropical survival game full of science and magic. The other thing to keep in mind is that this was made in collaboration with Capy games, and they deserve to have their names right next to Klei's on the credits of their own game, and not as a footnote on a dlc that they were strongly involved in.

 

 

Secondly, I'm sorry, but making Shipwrecked standalone is simply a bad idea.  Don't Starve has been refined and built up over many years, both by the DLC and the vanilla game itself.  It's pretty much in a perfect state of balance and content.  Not making Shipwrecked an add-on denies a ton of new stuff for BOTH games; the sailing mechanic for Don't Starve, and the high-quality of the original game for Shipwrecked.  I'm sure that Capy Games will understand if their name is on a DLC for a great game rather than on a lesser spinoff game.

 

 

 

Secondly, the attitude of the forums over the past couple of days. The Shipwrecked demo was met with a great deal of criticism, while people seem to have forgotten why Klei put a Work in Progress disclaimer at the top of the demo.

 

This brings me back to my first point; Klei operates off community feedback.  The Work-in-Progress disclaimer on top of the screen doesn't mean "Don't you dare criticize this!", it means "Please criticize this so we can make it better!" 

A much more polished final product can be expected. However, after Joew addressed the feedback, I've noticed a shift from backlash to something almost as unhelpful. Where previously the forums were filled with speculation about Shipwrecked, I am now seeing a forum filled almost entirely with demands for how Klei can fix Shipwrecked and demands that Shipwrecked meet the exact demands of the community. While I think we can all agree that we value a company that values our feedback, this attitude of demand is cancerous, and I can guarantee that if Klei gives in to this backlash, we will see a product that is severely compromised and worse off because of it.

 

Okay, this part admittedly annoyed me.  Giving feedback is not evil.  Describing the community's response as " a cancerous demand" is, again, an overdramatization.  The general consesus on Foodfight is that it's a terrible movie.  Is that cancerous feedback?  NO.  Because all the people who criticize it have very good reasons to.  Same concept here; most people don't want Shipwrecked as a standalone game because of very specific and thought-out reasons.  So obviously, they're going to state those reasons because that's how they feel.

 

Negative responses are not detrimental.  Trying to silence negative responses is detrimental.

 

That is all.

[ThaumicParrot]

The general consesus on Foodfight is that it's a terrible movie.

 

 

[emerphish]

Giving feedback is not evil.

 

Not sure if the debul is an authority on what constitutes as not evil. 

 

Just kidding, of course. I agree with you that Shipwrecked will be better for everyone if feedback is given.

[XirmiX]

I respect your pacifism, however if Klei ignored what we want from Shipwrecked and continued to make it the way they intended it, it would be a failure; many people, including myself would simply not buy the product. Most of us here do not want a new DS game, myself included. What most of us want is an extension of the already existing content, but since the first intention of Shipwrecked was to make it a whole new DS experience, nobody really got into that. Sailing through seas, looking for treasure, exploring the islands is nice as an addition, but it wouldn't be nearly as great if it was to be separate from a lot of the original content.

 

So, don't think that we got disappointed and demanding for no reason.

[SinisterOctopus]

I never said feedback was evil. And if you look at some of the threads, mainly the "Is it true that Don't Starve: Shipwrecked", and I ask that you do read through a lot of the comments in there, you'll notice a lot of the feedback is less than helpful. I saw responses ranging from rational to "It must be because Klei is a greedy corporation" to "I haven't seen it yet, but I won't buy it until Klei changes it" , with varying levels of rioting in between. And yes, I may have exaggerated the backlash a bit, but I genuinely believe that the game's quality will decrease if they change creative direction mid-development.

 

My referral to "cancerous demand" means that I think it is potentially harmful to the game's quality, and my problem with the demands is that the response we got from Joew was that they would talk about how they were going to address the feedback, not necessarily take the numerous demands as word of law.

[t0panka]

Dude you are taking those sentences out of context. I think many of those comments in that thread provide some actual feedback with of course "we don't like this" and "reconsider your decisions". As you said SW is in alpha so maybe they can do something about it but if they can't and give us good explanation why standalone (this is the problem that we don't know this) then we would be probably ok with that but these forums are for feedback on stuff that Klei put here so we provided that. Since this is weird decision at least until we hear some explanation we went maybe little hard on them but this is like in GTA they want to make update that cars will be out of the world and put there as minigame. Or in CS:GO they make update that takes AK-47 out of the game and you can use it only with bots. You know what i am talking about?

[SinisterOctopus]

Dude you are taking those sentences out of context.

 

I don't think I could interpret those sentences in context any more than I already have...

 

Once again, I have no problem with feedback. But feedback that essentially reads "Do this or I rage and do not buy" doesn't help anyone, and will arguably make Shipwrecked worse.

[XirmiX]

I don't think I could interpret those sentences in context any more than I already have...

 

Once again, I have no problem with feedback. But feedback that essentially reads "Do this or I rage and do not buy" doesn't help anyone, and will arguably make Shipwrecked worse.

So, you're saying that we should buy it even if we don't like the way it's implemented just so we can be more sympathetical? Dude, why would we buy what we don't want/don't want to use? The genre in which Shipwrecked would work as a standalone is not something I would like to get. Most people, like me are in favour of the old content and have this as an extension.

[SinisterOctopus]

So, you're saying that we should buy it even if we don't like the way it's implemented just so we can be more sympathetical?

 

I didn't say that anywhere in any of my posts. I said that response is not helpful to the game. Feel free to buy or not buy whatever you want. But imagine if a game like Half-Life included loadouts, and less puzzles, and rpg mechanics, just so that they could appeal to the people who said they wouldn't buy it because they don't enjoy that type of game.

[SinisterOctopus]

Most people, like me are in favour of the old content and have this as an extension.

Actually, from what I've read, it seems fairly balanced between people disappointed that it's going to be standalone and those who think people have overreacted to this news.

[Quyzbuk]

I share pretty much the exact same opinion as you do Sinister, particularly with this: 

 

And the overhaul of Don't Starve to create Shipwrecked means that a lot of content unnecessary to Shipwrecked will be removed, and a lot of new content will be added that honestly won't make sense in a Don't Starve Reign of Giants world with drastically different mechanics.

 

 

I said the same thing plenty of times yesterday, with the added caveat that trying to add so many new ideas and then somehow integrate it, conflicting parts and all, would pointlessly extend development time and costs to both us and them, with no guarantee of people not feeling like it was a hamfisted ordeal anyway. Doing it that way definitely looks, sounds, and feels like a "try to please everyone, please nobody" situation. 

 

 

Most of us here do not want a new DS game, myself included.

 

^ If that ain't one of the more baffling responses I don't know what is.

 

I'm not against adding more content to the toybox that is DS & RoG, but if they can give us another toybox with just as much, if not more from the new concepts, mechanics, and gameplay they want to put it in place, how is that a bad thing? Really now, the core gameplay would be the same, there's just more intricacies planned to be brought to it.

[grekon]

Sad, this thread is just sad. Where do I even start.............................. 

 

Well, if you are trying to tell people that they are overreacting all you need is to say "Some of you are overreacting a bit" instead of the "violent backlash" O.O Tbh you are overreacting to peoples overreactions...

 

Next thing... The arrangement between Klei and Cappy is for them to deal with and not for you to speculate about. You also need to consider what is going to happen if the SW expansion actually fails to impress and it is a standalone. If it was added as a dlc then people could enjoy things that would be good about SW and just leave the rest but if it is standalone we basically ditch the whole game and Cappy goes to hell while leaving Klei in problematic situation. 

 

The technical difficulty to implement the dlc into the base game  can only be determined by Klei. We should take it into consideration but you shouldn't use it as an argument to support the standalone expansion. And really you just think that "it makes sense"? Thats why you think that it should be a standalone expansion? How about you use that sense making and come up with a real advantage of standalone over dlc. Pls focus on game content mainly. For reference go to "is it true that Don't Starve: Ship Wrecked" thread and find my long post. Its shorter than yours but still kinda long.

 

And my final question. Have you actually read a post where a person actually believes that standalone is indeed better and backs it up with a decent argument? (as I already said ignore arguments that name technical issues as the reason, thats for Klei to determine)

[t0panka]

Guys lets say that we have SW as standalone ok?

= we have two (three with DST) save games to play. I don't know about you but this means i abandon DS save and play SW then i miss webber and caves so i play that save and at the end i won't play any save because i don't have 2984732 hours a day to play all three DS games

= ok lets say they add A LOT content like we have now in DS and ROG. They said that some features from DST will come to DS+ROG so now what we get ewecus in DS but not in SW? New items to DS or to SW? What about second game? Now they need to support another game? So someone will get content or someone don't? I don't think that this will make people happy. Also they have lot to do now with DS and DST and now SW? We already waiting forever for caves for DST so now we will wait even longer for something new which noones want right?

= so we play SW but after a while we get bored or whatever so ditch that and play DS+ROG? So they loose interest in that game and it is "gone" but if it was DLC we still can play with awesome old stuff and tons of content

 

BUT if this was standalone and Klei said that:

= it is standalone because we have this deal with Capy so we can sell more and earn more

= Capy will support this game for another year and add tons of new stuff

= we are done with DS and SW is our new priority

= in future we can add some old stuff to SW as updates

= or whatever as explanation why they went with standalone because i still don't get it

 

then maybe i didn't mind that much that SW is standalone? IDK i want to see DS+ROG live longer than this. But i think we can agree that standalone doesn't have many pro's as DLC right? 

 

Have someone another ideas why is SW better as standalone?

[Quyzbuk]

= we have two (three with DST) save games to play. I don't know about you but this means i abandon DS save and play SW then i miss webber and caves so i play that save and at the end i won't play any save because i don't have 2984732 hours a day to play all three DS games

 

Wha? Webber is coming to Shipwrecked. And... no the rest of that argument just doesn't make sense. You're still playing Don't Starve, that is NOT a negative.

 

 

 

= ok lets say they add A LOT content like we have now in DS and ROG. They said that some features from DST will come to DS+ROG so now what we get ewecus in DS but not in SW? New items to DS or to SW? What about second game? Now they need to support another game? So someone will get content or someone don't? I don't think that this will make people happy. Also they have lot to do now with DS and DST and now SW? We already waiting forever for caves for DST so now we will wait even longer for something new which noones want right?

 

Again, whaaaa? They have another studio working on the development of Shipwrecked with them, that means more people working together to make sure they bring the best experience possible, some of which (the smaller things) could spill over into the other games. How far into the future are you looking here...

 

 

 

= so we play SW but after a while we get bored or whatever so ditch that and play DS+ROG? So they loose interest in that game and it is "gone" but if it was DLC we still can play with awesome old stuff and tons of content

 

 

And you are assuming that you wouldn't get burnout even quicker if you had so much old content still floating around you? You are again assuming way too much. Deciding that Shipwrecked might be better off as a standalone means they have a LOT more planned than just your casual amount of content for a DLC. It could very well be double the size of RoG, who's to say?

[UnionGaming]

Wha? Webber is coming to Shipwrecked. And... no the rest of that argument just doesn't make sense. You're still playing Don't Starve, that is NOT a negative.

 

 

 

 

Again, whaaaa? They have another studio working on the development of Shipwrecked with them, that means more people working together to make sure they bring the best experience possible, some of which (the smaller things) could spill over into the other games. How far into the future are you looking here...

 

 

 

 

 

And you are assuming that you wouldn't get burnout even quicker if you had so much old content still floating around you? You are again assuming way too much. Deciding that Shipwrecked might be better off as a standalone means they have a LOT more planned than just your casual amount of content for a DLC.

 

One question. WHO IN THE HELL SAID WEBBER IS COMING?

[t0panka]

snip

Dude can you please stop quoting everyone and type your actual opinion. I asked that if someone have ideas about why is SW better as standalone. I did write my opinion please write yours without quoting everyone. And as someone above me said do not mention technical stuff since we don't know a thing about that. Thanks

 

 

One question. WHO IN THE HELL SAID WEBBER IS COMING?

 

This is on SW site. But i don't know how abigail will follow or if there are spiders for webber, etc.

 

"Wilson and the whole Don’t Starve cast of characters embark on a sea-bound journey of exploration, adaptation and of course, starvation."

[Hundkerchief]

I [...] fan.

 

No violence. No out of hand. Disappointment. Alternatives suggested.

Money mentioned ≠ accusation of greed. 

No demands. Suggestions. 

Stop shortcuts. Discrediting.

Interesting view. Well written.

[Quyzbuk]

Dude can you please stop quoting everyone and type you actual opinion. I asked that if someone have ideas about why is SW better as standalone. I did write my opinion please write yours without quoting everyone. And as someone above me said do not mention technical stuff since we don't know a thing about that. Thanks

 

I'm quoting you to let you know I'm responding... to YOU. Also, you're really gonna go and pull a "pot calling the kettle black" by saying not to quote and then referencing a quote?

 

I saw you lurking around the other threads I've posted in (including this one on page one no less), so I'm sure you've read the rest of what I have to say about it being a good thing if it remains as a standalone, just re-read those and stop making excuses.

[1v0]

I want to make another point of view , sooner or later DST will have all of DS content (caves + ruins) and SW comes as stand-alone what happens to DS + ROG then ? Simple no one will play it anymore , why play it when you can as easily play DST (which will have more content than DS+ROG) but if SW is part of DS that's a reason to play DS not DST ! At the moment I don't play DS simply because there is nothing new in it and I have already mastered that world . And when all the content mix in one not only SW will be better and the old content as well , think about it . It will give DS a whole new look and way of playing (of course there should be option to disable it like ROG) .

[SinisterOctopus]

Sad, this thread is just sad. Where do I even start.............................. 

 

Well, if you are trying to tell people that they are overreacting all you need is to say "Some of you are overreacting a bit" instead of the "violent backlash" O.O Tbh you are overreacting to peoples overreactions...

 

You see my overreaction to people's overreactions, and you raise me one overreaction to my overreaction to people's overreactions.

 

A lot of people seem to be caught up on the fact that I used harsh words like "violent backlash" and "cancerous attitude", which honestly I just used to emphasize my point. If you realize that violent is just a synonym for severe, or even antagonistic, and that cancerous is just a synonym for corrupting, you might realize there's some value to my points. At this point, I'm convinced that people are deliberately misunderstanding me.

 

Next thing... The arrangement between Klei and Cappy is for them to deal with and not for you to speculate about. You also need to consider what is going to happen if the SW expansion actually fails to impress and it is a standalone. If it was added as a dlc then people could enjoy things that would be good about SW and just leave the rest but if it is standalone we basically ditch the whole game and Cappy goes to hell while leaving Klei in problematic situation. 

 

I'm not speculating. It has been explicitly stated that while the majority of the Don't Starve team is working on DST, Capy has been handling the majority of Shipwrecked, with some help from the DS team that isn't busy. So, I 100% think that Capy deserves to call this their own game. As for the standalone, I don't think it will fail any more than Don't Starve will. Both games meet very specific tastes of gamers, and won't necessarily be the games for everyone, and people who like DS may not like Shipwrecked and vice versa. As a standalone, I think there is something to be said for fans of Capy or people who don't necessarily like wilderness survival games being able to jump right in to a tropical survival game that doesn't start you off with the message that Shipwrecked is recommended only for experienced Don't Starve players.

 

The technical difficulty to implement the dlc into the base game  can only be determined by Klei. We should take it into consideration but you shouldn't use it as an argument to support the standalone expansion. And really you just think that "it makes sense"? Thats why you think that it should be a standalone expansion? How about you use that sense making and come up with a real advantage of standalone over dlc. Pls focus on game content mainly. For reference go to "is it true that Don't Starve: Ship Wrecked" thread and find my long post. Its shorter than yours but still kinda long.

 

I didn't say anything about technical difficulty, if you'll read my post. (Reading my post before commenting is the polite thing to do.) As for why it makes sense, the copout answer is that Klei (who I'm willing to bet has made more successful games than anyone here) said that Shipwrecked would be a standalone expansion.

 

But that's besides the point. What people are failing to understand is that the main point of my longwinded (and occasionally overly emphatic) post is that the Frankensteinian sum of everyone's individual game preferences will not be as good as Klei's creative vision for Shipwrecked.

[emerphish]

But feedback that essentially reads "Do this or I rage and do not buy" doesn't help anyone, and will arguably make Shipwrecked worse.

YOU AND EXACTLY YOU DEFINE EVERYTHING THAT IS WRONG WITH THE ENTIRE GAMING INDUSTRY!

 

I am not normally one with a short temper but the ONLY way that feedback hits home with the developers is if you AIM FOR THEIR WALLETS! If people protested lackluster and low amount of content in games, do you think that Activison would have been able to make TWO DLCs out of content already on the game disc with Destiny? NO!

 

As fans of Klei, a company that respects their consumers and cares about the quality of their game, we have become spoiled. Many game companies care about the green, and little else. You know how to make feedback meaningful? You make sure it is in the developers' best interest financially to listen. 

 

I apologize, and mean no hate, but some things need to be said, and need to be said in bold, italicized capital letters.